
.^2S3 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2010 with funding from 
The Library of Congress 



http://www.archive.org/details/rebellionclaimofOOstew 




REBELLION CLAIM OF THE STATE OF NEVADA. 



If there are any claims that are just and proper, which the United States 
ought to pay. this is one of them. It is as sacred an obligation, in my ,iudg- 
ment. as the national bonds.— .Seuofor Teller. 

There is no sort of question as to its justice. It is just as much due as your 
board bill, which you have to pay every raoutla.— Senator Hawley. 

I want to say to the Senator from Nevada that the Senate is committed to 
these State claims by vote, by sentiment, and it is only a question of time 
when they will pass.— .Seuaior Hale in ISHl. 



SPEECH 



HON. WILLIAM M. STEWART, 



OF NEVADA, 



SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, 



Wednesday, June 6, 1900. 



■W^SHinSTGTOlSr. 

1900. 



,S?53 



SPEECH 

OF 

HON. WILLIAM M. STEWAET, 



The Senate having under consideration the rejection by the House of the 
following amendment of the Seijate to the bill (H. R. 11212) making appro- 
priations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the tiscal year 
ending June 30, 19U1, and for other purposes: 

•'To pay the State of Nevada the sum of S463,441.97 for moneys advanced 
in aid of the suppression of the rebellion in the civil war, as found and re- 
ported to Congress on January 22, 19U(J. by the Secretary of the Treasury, as 
provided in the act of Congress approved March 3, ls99 "'— 

Mr. STEWART said: 

Mr. President: I regret very much that the House did not agree 
to this amendraent. It will be a sorry disappointmeut to Nevada. 
I am compelled to take the liberty to make a short statement with 
regard to it, although the hour is late. The erroneous impressions 
which surround the claim must be now dispelled. There is no 
other claim of any State bearing the slightest analogy to it. except 
the claims of California and Oregon. There is no danger of its 
being made a precedent, for every other State has been paid in 
full for like aid in su))pressing the rebellion. The contention that 
other States have claims of a similar nature is false. The claims 
of California, Oregon, and Nevada are preciselj- of the same char- 
acter as the claims of the other States which have been paid. 
These claims are for arming, equipping, and paying soldiers in 
aid of the suppression of the rebellion. Although bounties were 
paid to soldiers by California. Oregon, and Nevada and by indi- 
viduals with great liberality, no claim has been presented for any 
such bounties. The claim they present is for supplying, equipping, 
and paying soldiers. 

A peculiar condition arose on the Pacific coast which did not 
exist elsewhere. The United States for more than eleven years 
preceding the outbreak of the rebellion paid the army operating 
-on the Pacific fully twice as much as was paid to the soldiers in 
the Atlantic States, for the reason that the expense of living on 
the Pacific coast was more than double the expense of living in the 
Atlantic States. 

The following acts of Congress show the legislative policy of the 
Government: 

On the 17th of June, 1850, an act was passed, the third section 
of which reads as follows: 

Sec. 3. And be it further enacted. That whenever enlistments are made at, 
or in the vicinity of, the said military posts, and remote and distant stations. 
a bounty equal in amount to the cost of transporting and subsisting a soldier 
from the principal recruiting depot in the harbor of New York to the place 
of such enlistment be, and the same is hereby, allowed to each recruit so 
enlisted, to be paid in unequal installments at the end of each year's service, 
3 4541 



so that the several amounts shall annually increase and the largest be paid 
at the expiration of each enlistment. (U. S. Stat., volume 9, page 439.; 

On the 23d of September, 18o0, the following provision was in- 
serted in the Ai*my appropriation bill: 

For extra pay to the commissioned officers and enlisted men of the Army 
of the United States, serving in Oregon or California, $3:io,854, on the follow- 
ing basis, to wit: That there shall be allowed to each commissioned officer as 
aforesaid, whilst serving as aforesaid, a perdiem, in addition to their regular 
pay and allowances, of S- each: and to each enlisted man as aforesaid, whilst 
serving as aforesaid, a per diem, in addition to their present pay and allow- 
ances, equal to the pay proper of each as established by existing laws, said 
extra pay of the enlisted men to be retained until honorably discharged. 
This additional pay to continue until the 1st of March, 1S52, or until otherwise 
provided.' (U. S. Stat., volume 9, page SO-t. ) 

Under these acts it was the established policy of the Govern- 
ment to make extra allowance to the officers and men amounting 
to fully double the amount paid in the Atlantic States. By some 
strange freak of fortune, probably accidental, a provision crept 
into the act of Auj^ust 3, 1861, reorganizing the Arm}', which 
changed the whole policy of the Government with regard to offi- 
cers and soldiers serving on the Pacific coast. The ninth section 
of that act reads as follows: 

Sec. 9. And be it further enacted. That the three months' extra pay allowed 
by the twenty-ninth section of the act of the .")th of July, 18:3.S, for reenlist- 
ments under certain conditions, the bounty granted by "the third section of 
the act of the ITth of June. 1850, for enlistments at remote and distant sta- 
tions and the premium now paid for bringing accepted recruits to the ren- 
dezvous, be, and they are hereby, abolished. C12 Stats., 388.) 

This legislation repealed all laws allowing extra pay on the 
Pacific and placed the Government in an unfortunate position. 
As the civil war progressed, the forces of the Confederate States 
invaded New Mexico and Arizona, and through their agency the 
Indians were inspired to cut off overland mail communication. In 
the meantime greenbacks had fallen from -iO to 50 per cent on the 
dollar. A soldier on the Pacific coast receiving his pay in greenbacks 
was compelled to convert it into coin, which reduced the amount to 
less than $8 per month. Plenty of men were ready to enlist in the 
cause of their country, but they could not with §8 a month supplj' 
themselves with those necessaries which a soldier serving in that 
country must have, and of course nothing was left for their faiii- 
ilies. 

The States of California and Oregon, and the Territory of Nevada 
were not behind any other section of the country in paying boun- 
ties to soldiers and in contributing to the sanitary fund. The 
Territory of Nevada contributed to that fund more in proportion 
to population than any State in the Union. None of the Pacific 
States have ever dreamed of demanding a dollar to be refunded 
from the General Government for bounties paid or for any other 
patriotic contributions. Still it is contended that if California, 
Oregon, and Nevada are paid for the advances which they made 
to put soldiers in the field, the other States must be paid for dona- 
tions and bounties. This is the only argument adduced against 
the claim, and it is contended in another place that if California, 
Oregon, and Nevada are paid, as the other States have been paid, 
for the money advanced to equip soldiers and put them in the 
field, the other States which have alreadj' received their money 
for tlieir legitimate advances will come forward and demand to 
have refunded all the money they have paid for bounties and do- 
4541 



nations. Such contention is without merit and extremely unjust 
to the Pacific States. 

Before Congress repealed the double pay and allowance which 
had been the established policy on the Pacific coast an act was 
passed on July 27. 1861. for the reimbursement of every State 
which had advanced and should advance money to equip and pay 
soldiers. It is as follows: 

An act to indemnify the States for expenses incurred by them in defense of 
the United States. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled. That the Secretary of the Treasury- 
be, and he is hereby, directed, out of any money in the Treasury'not other- 
wise appropriated, to pay to the governor of any State, or to his duly author- 
ized agents, the costs, charges, and expenses properly incurred by such State 
for enrolling, subsisting, clothing, supplying, arming, equipping, paying, and 
transporting its troops employed in aiding to stippress the present insur- 
rection against the United States, to be settled upon proper vouchers, to be- 
filed and passed upon by the proper accounting officers of the Treasury. 

Approved, July 27, 1S61. (IS Stat. L., page 276.) 

In 1862 Congress, by a resolution, gave this act a liberal con- 
struction. The following is the resolution: 

A resolution declaratory of the intent and meaning of a certain act therein. 

named. 

Whereas doubts have arisen as to the true intent and meaning of act No. 
18, entitled "An act to indemnify the States for expenses incurred by them 
in defense of the United States," approved July 27, 18tjl: 

Be it resolved by the Senate and House of Representatii'es of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled. That the said act shall be construed to ap- 
ply to expenses incurred as well after as before the date of the approval 
thereof. 

Approved, March 8, 1862. (12 Stat. L., page 615. ) 

The United States Supreme Court in the New York cases (160' 
U. S., 598) held that the act of July 27, 1861, and the resolution 
of Congress of March 8, 1862, created on the part of the United 
States an obligation to indemnify the States lor any costs, charges, 
and expenses properly incurred for the purposes expressed in the 
act of 1861. the title of which shows that its object was " to in- 
demnify the States for expenses incurred by them in defense of 
the United States." 

And again, on March 19, 1862, Congress adopted the following 
resolution: 

A resolution to authorize the Secretary of War to accept moneys appropri- 
ated by any State for the payment of its volunteers, an^i to apply the same 
as directed by such State. 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of 
America in Congress assembled. That if any State during the present rebellion 
shall make any appropriation to pay the volunteers of that State, the Secre- 
tary of War is hereby authorized to accept the same, and cause it to be ap- 
X)lied by the Paymaster-General to the payments designated by the legisla- 
tive act making the appropriation, in the same manner as if appropriated by 
act of Congress; and also to make any regulations that may be necessary for 
the dislmrsement and proper application of such funds to the specific pur- 
pose for which they may be appropriated by the several States. 

Approved, March 19, 1862. (12 Stat. L., page 616.) 

When the war was over all the States, except California. Oregon^ 
and Nevada, which contributed to put soldiers in the field and 
pay them, were reimbursed tor their expenditures. The sum of 
§•14,725,072.38 was distributed among the States as follows: 
45il 



[Senate Report No. U5, Fifty-fourth Congress. fir.st session.] 



Statement arcompunying Fhird 


Auditor's 


etterto the Secretary of the Treasury, 




dated March 15, 1392. 




Allowances by Third Auditor. 










Allow- 












ances by 






As reported 






Second 






in Senate 


Allow- 




Auditor, as 




State 


Ex. Doc. 


Total allow- 


reported 


Total allow- 




No. 1438, 


made 

since said 

list. 


ances by 


in Senate 


ances up to 




Fortieth 


Third 


Ex. Doc. 


Mar. 15, 




Congress, 


Auditor. 


No. 11, 


1892. 




second ses- 




Fifty-first 






sion, p. Ol. 






Congress, 
first ses- 
sion, p. 63. 




Connecticut 


.S3, 096, 950. 4P 


56,014.83 
301,133.38 


S3. 102, 965. 29 




$2,102.9a5.29 


Massachusetts 


■6, m\ 483. 07 


3,961,616.35 


$7,608.88 


3, 969, 225. 33 


Rhode Island 


723, 530. 15 




723,5.30.15 




723 530 15 


Maine 


1,027.1*5.01 
976,081.9:. 


448.99 
476.56 


1,027,633.99 
976, .5.58. 48 




1,027,6.33.99 

977,008.48 


New Hampshire . 


450.00 


Vermont 


832. 557. 4( 
3. 957. 996. 9,^ 




8:33,5.57.40 
4,060,734.30 


"i98,'938.'53 


832 557 40 


New York 


n02,737.33 


4.2.59,673.83 


New Jersey 


1,420,167.3: 


6, .548. 45 


1,436,71.5.80 


96,8.59.44 


1,533,575.34 


Pennsylvania 


3.204.6:36.2; 


14,390.04 


3,319,026.28 


667,074.35 


3,886,100.63 


Ohio 


3.345.319.5.'- 


71,. 348. 20 


3, 316, 667. 78 




3,316,667.78 


Wisconsin 


I,0a5, 059.1' 


24,103.86 


1,059,162.03 




1,0.59,162.03 


Iowa 


1,039,759.4;" 


.3,705.35 


1,043,464.80 




1,043,464.80 


Illinois 


3,080.442.51 


1,533.92 


3,0^1.9:5.4:3! 


3,081,975.43 


Indiana. 


3,668,539.78 




3, 6tis, .539. 78 1,073, 208. 51 


3,741,738.39 


Minnesota 


70,798.45 


463.45 


71,260.90 276.75 


71,5:37.65 




384. 138. 15 


2,298.31 


386, 436. 36 




386, 4:36. 36 
55 338 84 


Colorado 


55,3:«.84 
7,580.431.43 


996."37 


55,238.84 
7,581,417.80 




Missouri 




7,581,417.80 




844. 363. 53 


1, 493. 16 


845, 755. 69 




845, 755 69 


Delaware 


31.988.96 
133,140.99 




31.988.96 
136,281.64 




31,988 96 


Maryland 


3,140.65 




136.381.64 


Virginia 


48,469.97 




48, 469. 97 




48.4(39.97 


West Virginia 


471.063,94 




471, 063. 94 




471.0(>3 94 


3, 5U4, 466. 57 


47,137.4( 


3. 551, 603. 97 




3.5.51,603.97 








Total 


42,093,668.89 


.587, 967. 04 


42, 680, 655. 93 2. 044, 416. 45 44, 725, 072. 38 



* Included in this sum is an allowance of §16,197 43 to New York not yet ac- 
tually paid, but upon the list to be reported to Congress at its present ses- 
sion, for a deficiency appropriation. 

L. W. F. 

Second Auditor's Office, March 19. 1S9S (mail room). 

Third Auditor's Office, March 15, ISOl 

When California, Oregon, and Nevada presented their claims 
for precisely the same kind of disbursements, a technical objec- 
tion was made thereto in the Treasuiy Department. It was ai-- 
gued that inasmuch as the Government paid the officers and sol- 
diers serving on the Pacific coast the same amount in greenbacks 
which it paid the soldiers of the Eastern States, the Pacific States 
had no claim for money advanced by them. This argument 
vs^holly ignores the fact that the cost of "living on the Pacific coast 
at that time was at least three times as much as the cost of living 
in the Eastern States, and that the Government had recognized 
that fact and had. at all times previous to August 3, 1801. paid 
double compensation to officers and soldiers serving on the Pacific 
coast. Unfortunately the repeal of this extra allowance for the 
army of the Pacific occurred at a time when the ditterence in the 
cost of living and of supplies between the Atlantic and the Pacific 
was greater than ever before. Freights across the Isthmus and 

4541 



around the Horn were more than donbled hy reason of the war, 
and mail communication was hazardous and uncertain. 

An emergency finally arose in the early part of 1^08 which made 
the raising of troops in California. Oregon, and particularly in 
the Territory of Nevada indispensable. Overland mail communi- 
cation was cut off from the East by Indians cooperating with the 
Confederate forces, and the privateers of the Confederacy endan- 
gered mail communication by water. The Government pay of 
S13 a month in greenbacks, amounting to about §8 in gold, was 
wholly inadequate. More money had to be furnished to put 
troops in the field. The commanding officers on the Pacific coast, 
lander instructions from Washington, made rejuisition upon Cali- 
fornia, Oregon, and the Territory of Nevada for more troops The 
legislatures of those States and of the Territory of Nevada responded 
liberally and advanced enough money to make the pay of the sol- 
diers very nearly equivalent to the amount which the G-overnment 
had been in the habit of paying in those regions. Nobody had 
the slightest doubt that these advances would be reimbursed under 
the act of July 27, 18(J1. above quoted, which has served so good a 
purpose to the other States in securing for them over S44,0UU,000. 

On the 27th day of June, 1882, another act was passed to secure 
payment for the Indian wars of Texas and other States arising 
subsequent to the rebellion. California. Oregon, and Nevada were 
included in that act under the supposition that it would secure 
the payment of the war claims of those States. The first section 
of that act reads as follows: 

That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed, with 
the aid and assistance of the Secretary of War, to cause to be examined and 
investigated all the claims of the States of Texas, Colorado, Oregon, Nebraska, 
California, Kansas, and Nevada, and the Territories of Washington and Idaho, 
against the United States of America for monej's alleged to have been ex- 
pended and for indebtedness alleged to have been assumed by said States and 
Territories in organizing, arming, equipping, supplying, clothing, subsisting, 
transporting, and paying the volunteer and military forces of said States and 
Territories called into active service by the proper authorities thereof be- 
tween the 15lh day of April, in the year IStil, and the date of this act, to repel 
invasions and Indian hostilities in said States and Territories and upon their 
borders, including all proper expenses necessarily incurred by said States 
and Territories on account of said forces having been so called into active 
service as aforesaid, and also" all proper claims paid or assumed by said States 
and Territories for horses and ecjuipments actually lost by said forces while 
in the line of duty in active service (excepting and excluding therefrom any 
claim said State of Oregon may have for money expended and indebtedness 
assumed or incurred in suppressing Modoc Indian hostilities during the Modoc 
Indian war and in defending that State from invasion by said Indians during 
the years 187:i and 1873, which were submitted to and pa.ssed upon, by either 
approval or rejection, by Insp. Gen. James A. Hardie, United States Army). 
Said accounts for and on behalf of said State of Texas shall be confined to 
claims arising since the 20th day of October, 1865, and shall include the neces- 
sary expenses of defense against Mexican raids or invasions, as well as those 
for defense against Indian hostilities, and for and on behalf of said Territories 
of Idaho and Washington for said claims arising in the years 1877 and 1878. 
(22 Stats., 111.) 

After the passage of this act the Secretary of War represented 
that he could not perform the labor required imder the act with- 
out assistance, and a board of war claims examiners was provided 
by Congress under the following act: 

An act for the benefit of the States of Texas, Colorado, Oregon, Nebraska, 
California, Kansas, ;and Nevada, and the Territories of Washington and 
Idaho, and Nevada when a Territory. 

******* 

Sec. 2. The Secretary of War is hereby authorized to detail three Army ofiS- 

cers to assist him in examining and reporting upon the claims of the States and 

Territories named in the act of June 27, 1882, chapter 2-tl ot the laws of the 

Forty-seventh Congress, and such officers, before entering upun said duties, 

4541 



« 
7 

shall take and subscribe an oath that they will carefully examine said claims, 
and thatthey will, tothebestof theirability, make a just and impartial state- 
ment thereof, as required by said act. 

Approved August 1, 18t<6. (34 Stat. L., 217.) 

Secretary Lincoln con.sidering these acts together, namely, the 
acts of 18G1. under which the other States were paid, and the act 
of isy'2. came to the conclusion that the claims of California, Ore- 
gon, and Nevada could be paid under them without further legis- 
lation. But his successor. Secretary Endicott, raised all sorts of 
technical objections and nothing was done. Whereupon the Sen- 
ate adopted a resolution requiring the Board of War Claims Ex- 
aminers to investigate and report upon the claims of California, 
Oregon, and Nevada. The board did its duty faithfully and ex- 
amined with great care and particularity these claims and all the 
circumstances connected with them. Every item was scrutinized. 
Elaborate reports were made to Congress, consisting of three large 
volumes of about 750 pages each. (See Senate Executive Docu- 
ments 10, 11. and 17, Fifty-first Congress, first session.) 

1 hese reports were referred to the Senate Committee on Military 
Atfairs and that committee reported a bill for the payment of the 
claims, and an amendment for that purpose was put on the gen- 
eral deficiency bill of the second session of the Fifty-first Congress. 

The Pacific coast States, however, were unfortunate in the 
House. They had no representation on the Committee on Appro- 
priations. Mr. Sayers, of Texas, was a member of that committee 
and was fortunate enough to secure for Texas §1,175,793.37 for 
Indian wars which arose subsequent to the rebellion. 

The history of these claims in the two Houses of Congress is as 
follows: 

Fiftieth Congress, first session. Senate bill 2918. Reported from Commit- 
tee on Military Affairs by Mr. Stewart. Senate Report 1286. 

Senate bill i>12i). Introduced by Mr. Stewart. Reported from the Com- 
mittee on Military Affairs by Mr. Stewart. Senate Report 2014. Passed the 
Senate. 

Senate bill 3420. Favorably reported from the House Committee on "War 
Claims by Mr. Stone. House Report 3396. 

Fiity-flrst Congress. Senate bill 2416. Introduced by Mr. Stewart. Favor- 
aVily reported by Mr. Stewart, from the Committee on Military Affairs. 
Seriate Report 644. 

Letter trom the Secretary of War, transmitting a report upon the war 
claims of the State of Nevada. Senate Executive Document 10. 

House bill 7430. Introduced by Mr. Clunie. Favorably reported by Mr. 
Stone, from Committee on War Claims. House Report 2553. Passed the 
Senate in general deficiency bill March 3, 1891. 

Fifty- second Congress. Senate bill 52. Introduced by Mr. Stewart. Fa- 
vorably reported by Mr. Davis, from Committee on Military Affairs. Sen- 
ate Report 158. 

House bill 42. Introduced by Mr. Caminetti. Favorably reported by Mr. 
Stone, from the Committee on War Claims. House Report 254. 

Fifty-third Congress. Senate bill 1295. Introduced by Mr. White. Favor- 
ably reported by Mr. Davis from the Committee on Military Affairs. Sen- 
ate Report 287. 

S. 101, by Mr. Stewart. 

House bill 4959. Introduced by Mr. Maguire. Favorably reported by Mr. 
Hermann from the Committee on War Claims House Report .558. 

Fifty-fourth Congress. Senate bill 51, by Mr. Stewart, and Senate bill 
53, by Mr. Mitchell. Senate bill 16.50. Introduced by Mr. White. Favorably- 
reported by Mr. Stewart from Committee on Claims. Senate Report 145. 

House bill 31, by Mr. Johnson, of California. 

House bill 1346. Introduced by Mr. Maguire. Favorably reported by Mr. 
Ot.ten from the Committee on War Claims. House Report 1648. 

House bill 8733. reported by Mr. Hermann as a substitute. 

Fifty-fifth Congress. Senate bill 441. Introduced by Mr. Stewart. S. 
1141, by Mr. McBride Claim was favorably reported by Mr. Stewart from 
the Committee on Claims, as amendment to S. 3545 (the '"omnibus bill"). 
Senate Report 544, part 2. Passed the Senate in "omnibus bill." 

H. R. 396, by Mr. Maguire, of California. 
4541 



t 
8 

Fifty-sixth Congress. Amendment by Mr. Stewart to House bill 11337. 
Favorably reported from the (.'oumiittee on Claims by Mr. Stewart, Sen- 
ate Report 1:5.51, and pa>-sed the Senate May ol, lOUO. 

All these reports were unanimous, and it never occurred to the 
committees of the House or the Senate, where these cases were 
frequently argued, that there was any want of equity in the claims 
of these States. 

The difficulty of passing these claims and other acknowledged 
meritorious claims on appropriation bills led to a movement to 
consolidate them in an " omnibus bill." For that purpose the fol- 
lowing section was incorporated in the general deficiency appro- 
priation bill of July 19, 1)S97: 

To enable the Committee on Claims of the Senate to fully examine into all 
the evidence in all cases of just claims that are now before them, or that 
have been favorably reported and not finally disposed of, with the view of 
reporting the same to the Senate at the beginning of the next session of Con- 
gress, $1,(W Hi, to be paid from the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers 
approved by the chairman of said committee, and said sum, or any part 
thereof, in the discretion of the chairman, maybe paid as additional compen- 
sation to the clerk and assistant clerk of said committee. (30 Stats., i;38.) 

In the following session an "omnibus bill,"' providing for the 
payment of Southern claims. French spoliation claims, etc., was 
enacted into law. As the bill passed the Senate it contained the 
claims of California, Oregon, and Nevada without opposition. 
But the fate of the measure was very different in the House. An 
objection came in that body from a most unexpected source. 
Although I am not at liberty to discjiss the conduct of members 
in the other House, still I may allude to matters which have gone 
into history. The opposition of Mr. Loud, of California, defeated 
the claims of California. Oregon, and Nevada on the "omnibus 
bill." When that bill was before the House Mr. Loud said: 

Now, I want to say one word about the claims of the State of California. 
When this bill went into conference, I took occasion to repeat on this floor 
what had been repeated for many years and what I, without investigation, 
had accepted as a fact. You remember I held this claim up some time before 
. permitting it to go into conference. My own State had in that bill claims 
amounting to nearly S4,(XiO.(J00. It is a great temptation to the average mem- 
ber of Congress, Mr. Speaker, to see a claim of his own State or his own com- 
munity amounting to S^.OOO.OIIO included in a bill. There was an agreement, 
as I stated at that time, that those claims never should be passed upon favor- 
ably by tlie conferees. I made at that time the charge that there was a com- 
pact. Bfclieving then that those claims were just, I took occasion to say that 
every State in the Union had been paid for similar claims, and I imimedi- 
ately proceeded to investigate the record in this case, covering hundreds and 
hundreds of pages, musty now, to fortify myself to support these claims 
upon the floor of the House. 

The further I went into the investigation of these claims the more I was 
convinced, step by step, that they never had even equity before Congress. 
It may require some courage to say this with regard to the claims of a man's 
own State, but the claims of the State of California, the State of Oregon, and 
the State of Nevada, standing upon exactly the same plane, are simply 
claims for bounty; and there has not been a single State in the Union so far 
that has been reimbursed for the extra pay or bounty given to troops. — Con- 
flrensional Record^ Fifty-fifth Congress, third session. Volume 32, Part 3, page 
2658. 

This speech, of course, was fatal to the claims of the Pacific 
States. They were beaten in the House. The bill went into con- 
ference. The conferees on the part of the House could not agree 
to the payment of these claims, but suggested that the claim of 
Nevada, which was a Territory at the time the advances were 
made, be referred to the Secretary of the Tieasury for another 
investii^ation, and accordingly the following provision was incor- 
porated in the " omnibus bill " and became a law: 

That the claim of the State of Nevada for moneys advanced in aid of the 
suppression of the rebellion in the civil war be, and the same is hereby, re- 
4641 



9 

ferred to the Secretary of the Treasury to investigate aud report to Congress 
at the next session the amount furnished by said State of Nevada, or by the 
Territory of Nevada and assumed by said State, in aid of the suppression of 
the rebellion of the civil war, with such interest on the same as said State has 
actually paid, together with what amounts have been heretofore paid by the 
United States. (30 Stats., l^-'OB. ) 

The Secretary of the Treasury performed the duty required by 
this statute, and on the 19th day of January, 1900, made the fol- 
lowing report (House Document 322, Fifty-sixth Congress, first 
session), which was referred to the Committee on Appropriations: 

Treasury Department, Office op the Secretary, 

Washington, D. C, January 19, 1900. 
Sir: Referring to the act of March 3,1899 (30 Stat., page 1306), upon the sub- 
ject of the claim of the State of Nevada for moneys advanced in aid of the 
suppression of the rebellion in the civil war, and calling for report to Con- 
gress by the Secretary of the Treasury thereon, I have the honor to transmit 
herewith copy of statement of the case made by the Auditor for the War De- 
partment January 18, 1900. 

Respectfully, L. J. GAGE, Secretary. 

The Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Treasury Department, 
Office of Auditor for the War Department, 

Washington, January IS, 1900. 

Sir: In reply to your communication of March 11, 1899, requesting a report 
Tinder provisions of act of March 3, 1899, paragraph "State claims" (Public, 
190), upon the claim of the State of Nevada for moneys advanced in aid of the 
suppression of the rebellion in the civil war, I have the honor to state the fol- 
lowing: 

On December 34, 1889, the Secretary of War, acting in accordance with a 
resolution of the Senate of February 37, 1889, transmitted a full and complete 
statement showing the amount expended by the State of Nevada, with such 
interest on the same as the State had paid between February 10, 18(55, and 
June .30, 1889, amounting in all to the sum of $-tl2,t)00.31. This report is found 
in Executive Document No. 10, first session Fifty-first Congress. 

From a certified statement of Samuel P. Davis, State comptroller of Ne- 
vada, made on December 19, 1899, it appears that since the time covei-ed by 
the report of the Secretary of War— i. e., from June 30, 1889, to December 31, 
1899— the State of Nevada has paid the sum of $58,401.37 as interest upon money 
paid by the State in aiding in suppressing the rebellion in the civil war. Ac- 
cordingly, assuming this statement to be correct, the total amount expended 
by the State of Nevada, or by the Territory of Nevada and assumed by said 
State, with such interest on the same as the said State has actually paid, 
amounts to $471,001.58. 

Upon reports of an examination of this claim made by the State war claims 
examinei's, the Third Auditor, and the Second Comptroller of the Treasury, 
under act of June 37, 1883, the sum of 17,5.59.61 was allowed and paid to tile 
State of Nevada on April 10, 1888. This amount, deducted from the total 
amount paid by the State of Nevada, leaves the sum of §4(53,441.97 for which 
the State has not been reimbursed. The following is a tabulated statement 
of this claim: 

Amount of claim of the State of Nevada, including interest up to 
June 30, 1889, as shown in the report of tln^ Secretary of War (see 

page 10, Senate Document No. 10, Fifty-fir.st Congre.ss) $413,600.31 

Amount of interest paid by Nevada from June 30, 1889, to Decem- 
ber 31, 1899 58.401.37 

Total claim 471,001.58 

Amount which the State was reimbursed on April 10, 1888, under 
act of June 37, 1883.... 8.559.61 

Total paid by the State for which no reimbursement has been 

made 463,441.97 

Respectfully, 

F. H. MORRIS, Auditor. 

In compliance with this report the Senate inserted the follow- 
ing amendment in the sundry civil appropriation bill on May 31, 
1900: 

To pay the State of Nevada the sum of S4t53. 441.97 for moneys adv.^nced in 
aid of the suppression of the rebellion iu the civil war, as found and reported 
to Congress on January '2:i, 1900. by the Secretary of the Treasury, as pro- 
vided in an act of Congress approved March 3, 1899. 
4541 



10 

When this amendment was pending in the House, Mr. Moody 
of Massachusetts, as was natural, relied on the speech of Mr. 
Loud to defeat the claim. He said: 

Xow. one single word more, and 1 am done. The gentleman from Nevada 
said my first impression was in favor of tliis claim. So it was. As 1 under- 
stood it at first, I thought it ought to be paid. The gentleman from Califor- 
nia [Mr. Loud] made a speech on this subject at the last session of Congress 
which I want this House to hear. It refers to just the state of mind that I 
was in during the various stages of investigation. First I thought the claim 
ought to be paid; then I knew it ought not to be paid unless we were ready 
to set a dangerous precedent. 

Gentlemen will remember that while the State of Nevada has a claim of 
$4(10,(1110, the State of California has a claim of S-t,000,(JO0 of the same kind, 
standing on all fours, and that is agreed. Now, I ask the House to listen to 
what the gentleman from California said about this claim, his own State in- 
cliided, only March of last vear: and I call for order, Mr. Speaker, while this 
siieech is read. I think tne judgment of the gentleman from California is 
always good: and whenl find he has investigated a claim of S-1,000,0(I(.I of his 
own State and says it ought not to be paid, his statement is doubly entitled 
to the attention of the House: and therefore I ask the House to give it atten- 
tion. 

The Clerk read as follows: 

"Now I want to say one word about the claims of the State of California. 
When this bill went into conference, I took occasion to repeat on this floor 
what has been repeated for many years and what I, without investigation, 
had accepted as a fact. You remember I held this claim up some time before 
permitting it to go into conference. My own State had in that bill claims 
amounting to nearly Sl,000,fKJO. It is a great temptation to the average mem- 
her of Congress, Mr. Speaker, to see a claim of his own State or his own com- 
munity amounting to S4,(Kio,000 included in a bill. There was an agreement, 
as I stated at that time, that those claims never should be passed upon favor- 
ably by the conferees. I made at that time the charge that there was a com- 
pact. Believing then that those claims were just. I took occasion to say that 
every State in the Union had been paid for similar claims, and I immedi- 
ately proceeded to investigate the record in this case, covering hundreds and 
hudreds of pages, musty now, to fortify myself to support these claims 
upon the floor of the House. 

"The further I went into the investigation of these claims, the more I was 
convinced, step by step, that they never had even equity before Congress. 
It may require some courage to say this with regard to the claims of a man's 
own State, but the claims of the State of California, the State of Oregon, and 
the State of Nevada, standing upon exactly the same plane, are simply claims 
for bounty; and there has not been a single State in the Union so far that 
has been reimbursed for the extra pay or bounty given to troops." 

Mr. Moody of Massachusetts. Now, Mr. Speaker, that is true, and the con- 
chiding words of the gentleman from California are true. There has never 
been a single State paid any one of these claims. Millions and millions of dol- 
lars were paid by the States. Are you ready to begin now to pay one State 
a claim of that kind'!— Congressional Record, June 6, 1900. 

How anyone could have asserted that the claims of the Pacific 
States were for bounties and their pnyment would be a precedent 
for refunding all the bounties paid by other States is incompre- 
hensible. Certainly, anyone reading the reports of the War 
Claims Examiners and the numerous reports of the committees of 
both Houses of Congress would have been informed as to the na- 
ture of these claims. The following extracts from the reports of 
the War Clauns Examiners show the nature of the claims of Cali- 
fornia, Oregon, and Nevada, and the eiiuitable grounds upon 
which they rest: 

NEVADA. 

Extra viontlily pay— Liabilities assumed. 

It appears from the affidavit of the State comptroller (herewith, marked 
Exhibit No. 2) that liabilities to the amount of Sl,l-">'1.75 were assumed by the 
State of Nevada as successor to the Territory of Nevada on account of " costs, 
charges, and expenses for monthly pay to volunteers and military forces in 
the Territory and State of Nevada in the service of the United States," and 
that State wariants fully covering such liabilities were duly issued. It is 
also shown in the affidavit that of said warrants two for the sum of .•{ill. 33 and 
SK..'jO. respectively, have been paid, such payment reducing said liabilities to 
$l,133.!t2. 
4541 



11 

The circumstances and exigencies under which the Nevada legislature 
allowed this extra compensation to its citizens serving as volunteers in the 
United States Army are believed to have been substantially the same as those 
that impelled the legislatures of California and Oregon to a similar course of 
action for the relief of the contingent of troops raised in each of these States. 
Prices of commodities of every kind were extravagantly high during the war 
period in Nevada, which depended for the transportation of its supplies 
upon wagon roads across mountain ranges that were impassable for six 
months of every year, and at certain times, at least, during the said period 
the rich yields of the newly opened mines produced an extraordinary demand 
for labor, largely increasing wages and salaries. These high prices of com- 
modities and services were coexistent with, though in their causes independ- 
ent of, the depreciation of the Treasury notes, which did not pass current 
in that section of the country, though accepted through necessity by the 
troops serving there; and it is safe to say that in Nevada, as in California 
and Oregon, the soldier could buy no more with a gold dollar than could the 
soldier serving in the Eastern States with the greenback or paper dollar. 

On the whole, therefore, we are decided in the conviction that in granting 
them this extra compensation the legislature was mainly instigated by a de- 
sire to do a plain act of justice to the United States volunteers raised in the 
State and performing an arduous frontier service, by ])lacing them on the 
same footing, as regards compensation, with the great mass of the officers 
and soldiers of the United States Army serving east of the Rocky Mountains. 
It is true that the seven companies of infantry that were called" for on Octo- 
ber 19, 18(54, had not been organized; and that on March 8, 1865. three days 
before the ajiiiroval of the State law above noticed, the commanding general 
Department of the Pacific wrote as follows from his headquarters at San 
Francisco to the governor of Nevada (see page 287, Senate Executive Docu- 
ment No. TO. Fiftieth Congress, second session): 

" What jn-ogress is making in recruiting the Nevada volunteers? I will need 
them for the protection of the State, and trust that you may meet with suc- 
cess in your efforts to raise them. I hope the legislature may assist you by 
some sucn means as have been adojjted by California and Oregon." 

But the fact remains that the declared purpose of the monthly allowance 
was to give a compensation to the Nevada volunteers (see section 1 of the act 
last referred to), and that when measured by the current prices of the coun- 
try in which they were serving, their compensation from all sources did not 
exceed, if. indeed, it was eciual to, the value of the money received as pay by 
the troops starioned elsewhere, i.e.. outside of the Department of the Pa- 
cific. — Senate Executive Document No. lu. Fifty-first Congress, first session, 
page 7. 

CALIFORNIA. 

Extra pay to enlisted jnen. 

By an act approved April 27. 186.S, the legislature appropriated and set 
apart "as a soldiers" relief fund" the sum of S6(i(_»,(XKi, from which every en- 
listed soldier of the companies of California volunteers raised or thereafter 
to be raised for the service of the United States was to be paid, in addition to 
the pay and allowances granted him by the United States, a " compensation " 
of S-5 per month from the time of his enlistment to the time of his discharge. 

Drafted men, substitutes for drafted men, soldiers dishonorably discharged 
or discharged for disability existing at time of enlistment, were not to share 
in the benefits of the act, and, except in cases of married men having families 
dependent upon them for support, payment was not to be made until after 
discharge. Seven per cent interest-bearing bonds to the amount of St;(X),<KK), 
in sums of J5iX>, with coupons for interest attached to each bond, were au- 
thorized to be issued on July 1, 18(j3. (Pages 349-351, Statement for Senate 
Military Committee. ) 

A few unimportant changes respecting the mode of payment in certain 
;ases was made by act of March 15, 18ti4, and on March 31, 1806, the additional 
sum of S5.5l),0(X( was appropriated for the payment of claims arising under its 
provisions, such sum to be transferred from the general fund of the State to 
the "Soldiers' Relief Fund." 

Fearing that the total amount of $1,1.50.000 specifically appropriated might 
still prove insufiicient to pay all the claims accruing under the act of April 
27. 1863, above mentioned, the legislature directed, by an act which also took 
effect March 31, 1866 (page 004. Stats, of California, 1S6.5-66). that the remain- 
der of such claims should be audited and allowed out of the appropriation 
and fund made and created by the act granting bounties to the volunteers of 
California, approved April 4, 1804. and more fully referred to on page 19 of 
this report. 

Upon the certificate of the adjutant-general of the State that the amounts 
were due under the provisions of the act and of the hoard of State examin- 
ers, \varrants ainounting to 81.4.')'.).27o.21 were paid bv tlie .State treasurer, as 
shown by the receipts of the payees indorsed on said warrants. , 

4541 



12 

It is worthy of note here that on July 16, 1863, the Governor of California, 
replying to a communication from the headquarters Department of the Pa- 
cifle' dated July 5, 1863, advising him that under a resohition of Congress 
adopted March 9. 1863. the payments provided tor by the State law of April 
27. 1863, might be made through the officers of the Pay Department of the 
United States Army, stated that the provisions of said law were such as to 
preclude him from availing him.self of the oiler. 

Some information as to the circumstances and exigencies under which this 
money was expended may be derived from the following extract from the 
annual report of the adjutant-general of the State for the year 1862, dated 
December 1.5, 1862: 

"The rank and file of the California contingent'is made up of material of 
which any State might be proud, and the sacrifices they have made should 
be duly appreciated and their services rewarded by the State. I do most 
earnestly recommend, therefore, that the precedent established by many of 
the Atlantic coast States of paying their troops in the service of the United 
States an additional amount monthly should be adopted by California, and 
that a bill appropriating, say, S16 per month to each enlisted man of the 
troops raised or to be raised in this State be passed. * * * This would be 
a most tangible method of recognizing the patriotic efforts of our soldiers, 
relieve many of their families from actual destitution and want, and hold out 
a fitting encouragement for honorable service." (Page 58, Statement for 
Senate Committee on Military Affairs. ) 

Your examiners are of the opinion that the favorable action which was 
taken on the above recommendation of the Adjutant-General can not be justly 
ascribed to any desire on the part of the legislature to avoid resort to a con- 
scription, although the exclusion of drafted men from the benefits of the act 
indicates that they realized and deemed it proper to call attention to the 
possibility of a draft. Unlike the law of April 4, 1864, the benefits of which 
were confined to men who should enlist after the date of its passage and be 
credited to the quota of the State, the provisions of the act now under con 
sideration extended alike to the volunteers who had already entered or had 
actually completed their enlistment contract and to those who were to en- 
list in the future. There is every reason for the belief that the predominat- 
ing if not the only reason of the State authorities in enacting this measure 
was to allow their volunteers in the United States service such a stipend as 
would, together with the pay received by them from the General Government, 
amount to a fair and just compensation. In fact, as has already been stated, 
this was expressly declared to be the purpose of the act. 

It appears that up to December 31, 1862, those of the United States troops 
serving in the Department of the Pacific who were paid at all— in some cases 
detachments had not been paid for a year or more— were generally paid in 
coin, but on February 9, 1863, instructions were issued from the Treasury De- 
partment to the assistant treasurer of the United States at San Francisco 
that "checks of disbursing officers must be paid in United States notes." 
(Letter of Deputy Paymaster-General George H. Ringgold, dated February 
13. 18t)3, to Paymaster-General: copy herewith marked Exhibit No. 10.) 

Before this, greenbacks had become the current medium of exchange in all 
ordinary business transactions in the Eastern States, but in the Pacific Coast 
States and the adjoining Territories, gold continued to be the basis of circu- 
lation throughout the war. 

At this time the paper currency had become greatly depreciated, and on 
February 28, 18t>B, the price of gold in Treasury notes touched 170. This ac- 
tion of the Government in compelling troops to accept such notes as an equiva- 
lent of gold in payment for services rendered by them in a section where coin 
alone was current gave rise to much di^^satisfaction: for although gold could 
be bought in San Francisco at nearly the same price in Treasury notes as in 
New York, it must be remembered tfiat the troops in the Department of the 
Pacific were largely stationed at remote and isolated points. 

When paying in greenbacks for articles purchased by, or for services ren- 
dered to, them in these out-of the way places they were obliged to submit 
not only to the current discount in San Francisco' but also to a further loss 
occasioned by the desire of the persons who sold the articles, or rendered the 
service, to protect themselves against possible further depreciation. It ad- 
mits of little doubt that by reason of his inability to realize the full value of 
paper money, as quoted in the money centers, and of the fact that wages and 
the cost of living and of commodities of every kind were abnormally high 
(owing in great part to the development of newly-discovered mines in that 
region ), the purchasing power of the greenliack dollar in the hands of the av- 
erage soldier serving in the Department of the Pacific was from the latter 
part of 1862 onwai'd from 25 to 50 per cent less than that of the same dollar 
paid to his fellow-soldier in the East. 

Representation of the great hardship the Treasury Department's instruc- 
tions entailed upon the troops were promptly made. On March 10, 1863, the 
legislature telegraphed to Washington a resolution adopted on that date, in- 
structing the State's delegation in Congress to impress upon the Executive 
4541 



13 

"the necessity which exists of having officers and soldiers of the United 
States Army, officers, seamen, and marines of the United States Navy, and 
all citizen employees in the service of the Government of the United States 
serving west of the Rocky Mountains and on the Pacific coast, paid their 
salaries and pay in gold and silver currency of the United States, provided 
the same be paid in as revenue on this coast." (Page 46, statement for Sen- 
ate Committee on Military Affairs.) 

And on March 16, 1^*63, Brig. Gen. G. Wright, the commander of the De- 
partment of the Pacific (comprising, besides California, the State of Oregon 
and the Territories of Nevada, Utah, and Arizona), transmitted to the Adju- 
tant-General of the United States Army a letter of Maj. C. S. Drew, First 
Oregon Cavalry, commandant at Camp Baker, Oregon, containing an explicit 
statement of the effects of and a formal protest against paying his men in 
greenbacks. In his letter of transmittal (page 154, Ex. Doc. 70J, General 
Wright remarked as follows: 

"The difficulties and embarrassments enumerated in the major's commu- 
nication are common to all the troops in this department, and I most respect- 
fully ask the serious consideration of the General in Chief and the War 
Department to this subject. Most of the troops would prefer waiting for 
their pay to receiving notes worth but little more than half their face; but 
even at this ruinous discount officers, unless they have private means, are 
compelled to receive the notes. Knowing the difficulties experienced by the 
Government in procuring coin to pay the Army, I feel great reluctance in 
submitting any grievances from this remote department, but justice to the 
officers and soldiers demands that a fair statement should be made to the 
War Department." 

It was under circumstances and exigencies such as these that the legisla- 
ture themselves— all appeals to the General Government having proved fu- 
tile—provided the necessary relief by the law of April 27, 18(53. They did not 
even after that relax their efforts on behalf of United States troops, other 
than their own volunteers, serving among them, but on April 1, 1864, adopted 
a resolution requesting their representatives in Congress to "use their 
influence in procuring the passage of a law giving to the officers and soldiers 
of the Regular Army stationed on the Pacific coast an increase of their pay, 
amounting to 30 per cent on the amount now allowed by law."— Senate Exec- 
utive Document No. 11, Fifty-first Congress, first session, page 23. 

OREGON. 

Extra monthly compensation to officers and enlisted men of volunteers. 

The certificate of the State treasurer, duly authenticated by the secretary 
of state under the seal of the State, sets forth that the amounts severally 
paid out for the redemption of relief bonds, as shown by the books of the 
treasurer's office, as reported by the treasurer to the several legislative as- 
semblies and as verified by the several joint committees (investigating com- 
missions) of said assembly under the provisions of a joint resolution thereof, 
aggregate §90,476.32. The following books, papers, etc., are also submitted in 
evidence of payment: 

(1) The canceled bonds. 

(2) A copy of the relief bond register, the correctness of which is certified 
by the secretary of state and State treasurer, showing number of bond, to 
whom issued, date of issue, and amount of bond; also showing the date and 
rate of redemption. The reports of the joint committees of the legislature 
above mentioned, to the effect that they compared the record kept by the 
State treasurer with the bonds redeemed andfound theamounts correct and 
agreeing with the amounts reported by the State treasurer to the legislative 
assembly, are entered in said bond register. 

|3) Certificates of service given to the several Oregon volunteers upon 
which warrants were given entitling the holders to bonds. These certificates 
cover service for which the sum of ^86,639.8.5 was due. The remainder of the 
certificates, the State authorities report, were not found, and are probably 
lost or destroyed. 

(4) Copies of the muster rolls of the Oregon volunteers, certified to by the 
secretary of state, setting forth the entire service of each officer and enlisted 
man. 

In all, bonds amounting to $93,637 were issued. As has been stated, but 
S9(i,476.32 is found to have been expended in the redemption of these bonds, 
some of which were redeemed at less than their face value. Five bonds, 
valued at S"3l. have not been redeemed. 

The authority by which these bonds were is.sued is contained in an act of 
the legislature, which was approved on October 24, I8ii4 (copy herewith), ap- 
pronriating a sum not exceeding S10*'.W<), to constitute and be known as the 
"commissioned officers and soldiers" relief fund," out of which was to be 
paid to each commissioned officer and enlisted soldier of the comjianies of 
Oregon volunteers raised in the State for the service of the United States to 
aid in repelling invasion, etc., from the time of their enlistment to the time 

4541 



14 

of their discharge, S5 per month in addition to the pay allowed them by the 
United States. Enlisted men not receivinjj an honoi'able discharge from the 
service, or volunteers discharged for disability existing at the time of enlist- 
ment, were not to be entitled to the benefits of the act. nor was payment 
under the provisions thereof to be made to an enlisted soldier until he should 
be honorably discharged the service: but enlisted married men having fami- 
lies dependent upon them were authorized to allot the whole or any portion 
of the monthly pay accruing to them for the support of such dependents. 

A bond, bearing interest, payable semiannually, at 7 per cent per annum, 
redeemable July 1, 1875. with coupons for the interest attached, was to be is- 
sued by the secretary of state for such amount as the Ad jutan t-Geiieral should 
certify to be due under the provisions of the act to each man, whose receipt 
for the amount so paid him was to be taken by the secretary of state. Said 
bonds were to be paid to the recipient or order. 

The circumstances and exigencies that led to the enactment of the above- 
cited law and to the expenditures incurred under its provisions were sub- 
stantially the same as those which brought about the adoption of similar 
measures of relief in California and Nevada. It must have been patent to 
every one fully acquainted with the circumstances of the case that the vol- 
unteers that had been raised in Oregon at this time (October Si, 186-1), con- 
sisting only of the seven companies of the First Oregon Cavalry and the 
independent detachment of four months' men, a majority of whom had then 
nearly completed their term, had been greatly underpaid, considering the 
nature of the service performed by them and the current rate of salaries 
and wages realized in other pursuits of life. 

At the time of the enrollment and muster in of the First Oregon Cavalry, 
and up to the latter part of 1862, the Government paid those of its troops in 
the Department of the Pacific, that were paid at all, in specie; but, as often 
happened during the war, a number of the companies of the regiment 
named, occupying remote stations, remained unpaid for a long time and were 
finally paid in Treasury notes, some of the members having more than a 
year's pay due them. 

During the remainder of the war the Government paid its troops in the 
Department of the Pacific, as elsewhere, in greenliacks. Referring to this 
condition of things and to the fact that coin continued to be the ordinary 
medium of exchange in Oregon in private business transactions. Ma.]. C. S. 
Drew, First Oregon Cavalry, in a letter to his department commander, dated 
March i, 1863 (page 154. Ex. Doc. 70), called attention to the fact that at his 
station (Camp Baker) Treasury notes were worth "not more than 50 or .55 
cents per dollar;" that each officer and soldier of his command was serving 
for less than half pay, and had done so, some of them, for sixteen months 
past; that while capital protected itself from loss and perhaps realized bet- 
ter profits than under the old and better system of payment in coin, "the 
soldier did not have that power, and if paid in notes must necessarily receipt 
in full for what is equivalent to him of half pay or less for the service he has 
rendered, and must continue to fulfill his part of the contract with the Gov- 
ernment for the same reduced rate of pay until his period of service shall 
have terminated; and that "good men will not enli.st for S6 or S7 a month 
while $13 is the regular pay. and.moreover, being realized by every soldier in 
every other department than the Pacific." 

In forwarding this letter to the Adjutant-General United States Army, 
the department commander remarked that the embarrassments enumerated 
in the major's communication were common to all the troops in the depart- 
ment, and he therefore asked " the serious consideration of the General in 
Chief and the War Department to this subject." Some months later (Au- 
gust 18, 1863) General Alvord, while reporting to the department commander 
the location of a new military post at Fort Boise, referred to the difficulties 
encountered by the garrison charged with the duty of establishing it, as 
follows: 

" Some difficulty is experienced in building the post in consequence of the 
low rates of legal-tender notes. In that country they bear merely nominal 
value. The depreciation of the Government currency not only embarrasses 
the Quartermaster's Department, but also tends greatly to di-saflf ect the men. 
The differences between their pay and the promises held out by the richest 
mines, iierhaps, on the coast, the proximity of which makes them all the 
more tempting, is so great that many desertions occur."— £',i'. Doc. 70, 
page 188. 

About the same time (September 1, 1863) the adjutant-general of the State 
complained of the inadequacy of the soldiers' pay, resulting from the depre- 
ciation of the paper currency with which they were paid. Referring to the 
fact that after the expiration of eight months from the date of the requisition 
of the United States military authorities for six additional companies for the 
First Oregon Cavalry but oiie had been raised, he said: 

"And yet we are hot prepared to say that it is for the want of patriotism 
on the part of the people of Oregon, but from other causes, partly from the 
4511 



15 

deflcipncy in the pay of the volunteer in comparison with the wages given in 
the civil pursuits of life, as well as with the nature of the currency with 
which they are paid, the depreciation of which renders it hardly possible for 
the soldier to enlist from any other motive save jjure patriotism. And I 
would here suggest that the attention of our legislature be called to this de- 
fect, and that addi'ional pay, either in land, money, or something else, be 
allowed to those who have volunteered. Justice demands that this should be 
done." 

In enacting the relief law of October 24, 18(34, it is fair to presume that the 
legislature was largely influenced by the following statements and recommen- 
dations»of the governor contained in his annual message dated September 
15, 1864: 

"The Snake and other tribes of Indians in eastern Oregon have been hos- 
tile and constantly committing depredations. The regiment has spent two 
summers on the plains, furnishing protection to the immigration and to the 
trade and travel in that region of the country. During the iiast summer the 
regiment has traveled over twelve hundred miles, and the officers and men are 
still out on duty. The officers and most, if not all, the men joined the regi- 
ment through patriotic motives, and, while some of the time they have been 
traveling over rich gold fields, where laborers" wages are from S3 to $.5 per 
day, there have been very few desertions, and that, too, while they were being 
paid in depreciated currency, making their wages only about $5 per month. 

A great many of these men have no pecuniary interest in keeping open the 
lines of travel, protecting mining districts and merchants and traders. The 
benefit of their service thus insures [inures] to the benefit of others, who 
should help these faithful soldiers in bearing these burdens. Oregon, in pro- 
portion to her population and wealth, has paid far less than other JBtates for 
military purposes. California pays her volunteers §5 per month extra in 
coin. It would be but an act of simple justice for this State to make good to 
the members of this regiment their losses by depreciated currency. (Page 
87, Statement for Senate Military Committee.) 

It is to be noted here that while the officers and men who became the bene- 
ficiaries of this law had been paid in a depreciated currency, which in Oregon 
does not appear to have had more than two-thirds of the purchasing power 
it had in the East, the Government provided them with clothing, subsistence, 
shelter, and all their absolutely necessary wants. On the other hand, it is to 
be borne in mind that the legislature must have been aware of the fact noted, 
and that it granted the extra compensation from a sense of justice and with- 
out any purpose calculated to benefit the State at large, such as might be 
reasonably inferred from the granting of bounties to men " who should here- 
after enlist." As has been already mentioned, the terms of the Oregon vol- 
unteers were drawing to a close and the benefits of the law were restricted 
to the volunteers "raised." and did not therefore include those "to be 
raised..''^— Senate Exiecutive Document No. i7. Fifty-first Congress, first session, 
page 14. 

The majority of the House of Representatives, relying upon the 
statement of Mr. Loud, were evidently under the impression that 
these claims are for bounty and would be precedents for paying 
other States vast sums of money, and therefore voted against the 
claim. That impression may be removed by a correct under- 
standing of the facts. If California would send a united delega- 
tion to Congress in favor of her just claims they would undoubtedly 
be paid, and Nevada would also receive what honestly belongs to 
her, Nevada is poor and needs the money. She contributed it 
at a time when the nation was in need of troops and when the Gov- 
ernment could not obtain them without the assistance of the Ter- 
ritory of Nevada. 

The claim of Nevada was so well understood in the Senate that 
it needed no argument to put it upon an appropriation bill. It 
had been considered so often and was so well umlerstood by the 
able and leading men of the Senate who had participated in its 
discussion that as early as March o, 18t(l, when an amendment for 
the payment of the claims of California, Oregon, and Nevada was 
pending in the Senate, which amendment passed that body, Mr. 
Hale said: 

I want to say to the Senator from Nevada that the Senate is committed to 
these State claims by vote, by sentiment, and it is only a question of time 
when they will pass. 
4541 



013 701 736 2 



16 



And on the 31 st of May last, when the amendment for the pay- 
ment of the claim of Nevada was pending in the Senate, and which 
was defeated in the House on the strength of the speech of Mr. 
Loud, Senator Hawley, chairman of the Committee on Military 
Affairs, from 'which the Pacific States' claims had been twice 
favorably reported, said: 

There is no sort of question as to its justice. It is just as much due as your 
board bill, which you have to pay every month. 

On the same occasion Senator Teller, who had reported the 
claims of California, Oregon, and Nevada in the omnibus bill and 
passed them through the Senate, rose in his place and said: 

If there are any claims that are just and proper which the United States 
ought to pay, this is one of them. It is as sacred an obligation, in my judg- 
ment, as the national bonds. 

I might quote almost without end statements of leading Sena- 
tors to the same effect. The reports of the committees of the 
House are equally strong in favor of the equity of these claims, 

I do not want to be understood as claiming that the California 
delegation as such has been uniformly opposed to these claims. 
On the contrar)', so far as my knowledge goes, the representa- 
tives from California in both Houses have been strongly in favor 
of the justice and equity of the claims of the Pacific States. 
Messrs. Clunie, Maginre, Caminetti, Johnson, Morrow, and Mc- 
Kenna and Senator White were active in their support. Sena- 
tor Perkins has been very earnest and persistent in supporting 
these claims ever since he has been a member of the Senate, and 
I believe that California will ultimately come to the rescue and 
aid in the passage of bills for their payment. I hope no further 
opposition to the payment of the just claim of Nevada will com© 
from that source. 

loil 

o 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



0.13 701 736 2 



pei^nulTpea 
pHSJ 



